Prototype modeling - how far can you take it?

[nkp_174]

Actually the thought of prototype operation started in the 40's.In the 50's Brass and early RTR engines and easy to assemble plastic car kits made operation even more possible.

Frank Ellison wrote a 6 part article on prototype operation in the 40s.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.trains.com/mrr/objects/pdf/august_online_extras_new_1.pdf">http://www.trains.com/mrr/objects/pdf/a ... _new_1.pdf</a><!-- m -->


So,As you can see prototype operation isn't anything new including operators vs. builder debates that rage at hobby shops and mrr clubs..

That's not what I mean by prototype modeling. Model railroading's infancy was before the 1940s. And as for "operation"...I can operate an 0-4-0t prototypically on 12" of track...therefore, such a liberal definition of "proto-freelance" bears no meaning as it extends to all extremes. John Allen made a distinction between just "running" trains and "operating" them...and that is the basic jist of what Mr. Delta Lines is saying in that article. You can operate a spaghetti bowl just like a real railroad...many articles of that period seemed to point that out. It doesn't make the layout "prototypical" nor does it make the equipment "prototypical"...just as my stratocaster isn't any more of a rock guitar than it is a country guitar...as such is a product of the person playing it. Having my friend who is really into operation run my layout doesn't change it from freelance to proto-freelance...as the layout is unchanged.

Only the most skilled could attempt to model their railroad of choice back with Cliff Grandt built his 1:96th scale locomotive (half o-scale). Few attempts were made in the tinplate era for this very reason...it was tough to do. Even when things did get going, with the post-ww2 boom, I'm under the impression that it was very difficult to really build up a roster representative of most real railroads...but it got easier as Max Gray gave way to PFM and thousands of imports...so long as you had the cash, skill, and time.

A freelance heisler, in my opinion, needs to follow the actual practices of the Heisler locomotive company to be believable. For instance, Heislers drivers were 30"-40" in diameter...On30 heisler conversions based on the HO heislers look cartoonish because they violate the prototypical practices. Would you call this proto-freelance? I would call it a toy...for it isn't very believable even though it may be super detailed. Anyone remember the miniland caricatures? On the contrary, a completely freelanced geared locomotive, not infringing upon the Heisler patents, could have 22" drivers. Yet, I'm sure that plenty of people would enjoy such a model...just as I enjoy my electrically powered "steam" engines.

If "operation" is a product of the person at the throttle, how can it be a product of the layout? I don't see how...but I do see how a layout can lend itself to being more or less believable...and give more or less operational interest. For me, that means a long run with passenger stations...while, IIRC, that means a nice yards for Russ B.

2-8-2, what is freelance operation, since you are distinguishing between them?

If someone is purely a builder, and never runs their trains, is their layout considered to be a prototypical operation or a freelance operation? Similarly, does operating a completely fictitious layout cause it to conform to a prototype?